The funds allocated to alternatives of EV (Including ICE, Fool Cell, and others.) are considered by many to be attempts to KILL EVs! (IMHO)
Dennis Lee Miles (*[email protected] <[email protected]>)* * Founder: **EV Tech. Institute Inc.* *Phone #* *(863) 944-9913 (12 noon to 12 midnight Eastern US Time)* *Educating yourself, does not mean you were **stupid; it means, you are intelligent enough, **to know, that there is plenty left to learn!* * You Tube Video link: http://youtu.be/T-FVjMRVLss <http://youtu.be/T-FVjMRVLss> * On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV <[email protected]> wrote: > I hope no one suggested that the focus of the group be FCEVs. This is one > of my favorite lists, in part due to your great news posts. > > But I'm curious about your comment "there are billion$ of > dollar$ being spent to kill [EVs]." > > Where are you seeing this? The last few years I've seen a huge > comprehensive effort with dollars attached to providing and ensuring > infrastructure. > > I've not seen any money put into killing EVs. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jul 29, 2014, at 2:36 PM, brucedp5 via EV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > As an evdl member, my vote is continue with the existing limitation on OT > > items specified in the evdl charter, so that they do not dominate the > focus > > of the evdl, ... EVs. > > > > IMO: fcvs are not Electric Vehicles (EVs) that can plug into the stable > > electrical grid or an outlet the homeowner has powered of their own > > electrical power. fcvs are Electrified Vehicles (has some EV > > components/guts) and are the same as a hybrid (chemical-fuel powered, and > > can not plug-in) > > > > Why my vote to not change the evdl? Because: > > > > - As David reminded us, there are many non-EV discussion > forums/groups/areas > > to discuss those topics that are defined as OT on the evdl. > > > > If you want to discuss Apple-products, the non-Apple forum is not the > > place to do that. > > If you like to use Kodachrome film, the digital camera forum is not the > > place to do that. > > If you like to express your lobbyist joy of the smell at the La Brea > > tarpits.org , the cleanair.org forum is not the place to do that. > > > > Topics defined as OT by the evdl charter should be, and can easily be > > discussed on other forums/groups/areas on the Internet. > > > > - It is the EV that needs the help/assistance, as there are billion$ of > > dollar$ being spent to kill them. Not needing help are the well funded > h2, > > fcv, or hybrids. Those have plenty of money behind them, and plenty of > > forums to discuss them. The public has been pre-programmed to be > clueless as > > to what to do when it comes to EVs (I have a future post about that where > > ice-heads are lost when it comes to making an EV). > > > > - An EV interested/curious newbie coming to the evdl and seeing tiresome > > excessive heated non-EV focused discussions might think, the evdl is not > the > > place to be asking my EV-conversion questions. There are still many > people > > doing their own conversions (I have future news items I will be posting > > showing that). > > > > And on many of those I have read, the new EV owner saying, "Yea, I got a > > lot of help figuring out what to do by talking to the EV guys on the > > Internet". Was that the evdl, possibly. Or maybe they came to the evdl > > because the evdl is much easier to find, and learned of other > > areas/local-groups/EV-component-sources to explore to accomplish their EV > > goal (like the evdl is a well established EV-sign-post directing > > EV-interest). We definitely do not want OT to dilute honest plugin EV > > discussions, nor turn the potential EV builder away with disruptive, > > counter-productive OT posts. > > > > My first experience with Clyde's EV list was as a focus point for the > > public to come and get the help they need to build an EV, because at that > > time EVs were not produced, you either had to build your own, or have one > > made by a converter (like I did). Remember there are many parts of the > world > > where building an EV as not off-the-shelf easy as it is in the U.S. If a > > person wants to learn about EVs, the evdl has been the place for them to > > come and discuss that for decades. Non-EV discussions dilute that > EV-focus. > > > > - Discussions of items defined as OT by the evdl charter which were > decided > > by previous evdl members, was done for some good reasons. Not only did > the > > OT discussions get 'tiresome', but nasty, which is another > > turn-off/turn-away for people wanting EV help. evdl members decided to > limit > > 'those' discussions by defining them as OT, and have them taken offline > > quickly. > > > > In its long history, the evdl has had many people come in and quickly > want > > to change a well established evdl. The last 'bout being about racing. > While > > small quick discussions are allowed, the heated, nasty, domination of the > > evdl into the chaos of the past are not allowed. As there are plenty of > > other places to discuss racing, the evdl limits racing discussions. > Ergo, so > > were other topics decided by evdl members as OT that need to be limited. > > > > - The current evdl charter does not ban such OT discussions in passing, > just > > limit them to be taken off-line/elsewhere quickly. People do occasionally > > drive too-close or over the white-line, but with a few honks from other > > drivers know to stay in their lane. It is less about absolute-conformity > ( > > nicht-EV verboten! ), but more about being focused with the EV-task at > hand. > > This flexibility allows for the occasional stray into OT land, but the > known > > evdl guidelines keeps most evdl discussions on-EV-topic, and not allowed > to > > disintegrate evdl discussions into a disruptive-troll's cesspool. > > > > > > If you all will notice, the amount of h2/fcv discussions on the evdl has > > exploded since the automakers have gone into production. I look at these > > 'forced' current h2 fcv discussions on the evdl, as an 'invasion of the > body > > snatchers'. That is, it is like the pro-h2 fcv guys want to take over and > > dominate the evdl (here we go again!). > > > > Anyone who has had pent up frustrations of not being able to discuss > items > > defined as OT on the evdl, should not take it out on other evdl member > > because they either want take-over/destroy the evdl's EV-focus, or are > too > > lazy to go elsewhere. > > > > > > {brucedp.150m.com} > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVDL-biz-H2-and-FCEV-discussion-tp4670639p4670647.html > > Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA ( > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140730/1849ffb9/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
